Synergistic Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole mixtures for diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper control

ABSTRACT

The present invention generally relates to the use of synergistic amounts of  Bacillus thuringiensis  subsp.  kurstaki  and cyantraniliprole for the control of diamondback moths, Beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and Soybean looper. Specifically, the synergistic weight ratio of  Bacillus thuringiensis  subsp.  kurstaki  to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally relates to the use of synergisticamounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprolefor the control of diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, andsoybean looper.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Lepidoptera is an order of insects which includes moths and butterflies.It is estimated that there are over 174,000 Lepidopteran species,included in an estimated 126 families. Lepidopteran species undergo acomplete metamorphosis during their life cycle. Adults mate and layeggs. The larvae that emerge from the eggs have a cylindrical body andchewing mouth parts. Larvae undergo several growth stages called instarsuntil they reach their terminal instar and then pupate. Lepidoptera thenemerge as adult butterflies or moths.

While some Lepidoptera species are generally considered beneficialorganisms due to their aesthetic appeal, many species cause devastatingdamage to crops. Specifically, diamondback moths, beet armyworms,sugarcane borers, soybean loopers and corn earworms are especiallyproblematic to crop growers.

Diamondback moths (Plutella xylostella) are a widespread pest that candisperse long distances. Diamondback moth larvae eat the leaves, buds,flowers and seed-buds of cruciferous plants. A heavy infestation cancompletely remove all foliar tissue from a plant leaving only the leafveins. Even a lighter infestation can result in the unsuitability of anentire lot of produce for sale. In the past, diamondback moths have beentreated with a variety of insecticides including pyrethroids and otherinsecticides.

Beet armyworms (Spodoptera exigua) are another widespread pest that isdifficult to control. The larvae are voracious eaters that defoliatehost plants. Older instars can also burrow into the plants. The damageto the host plant renders it unmarketable. Beet armyworms are pests onnumerous types of crops.

Soybean loopers (Chrysodeixis includens) are a moth that is prevalent inNorth and South America. The larvae of soybean loopers can inflict heavyfoliage damage resulting in significant crop loss. Soybean loopers aredifficult to control with insecticides. Infestation of soybean looperscan be exacerbated after a non-selective insecticide removes the soybeanloopers' natural predators.

Southwestern corn borers (Diatraea grandiosella) are a moth with a rangeextending from the southern United States to Central America.Southwestern corn borers are pest to highly consumed and profitablecrops such as corn and sugarcane. The larvae feed within the whorl ofthe corn plant early in the life cycle of the plant often destroying thebud resulting in complete loss of yield.

Sugarcane borers (Diatraea saccharalis) mostly attack sugarcane andsweet corn crops, but will also infest other host plants. The larvaeburrow into the stalks of the older plants causing the plant to weakenand break off or die. In younger plants, the inner whorl of leaves willdie and yields will be impacted. Secondary fungal infections may alsocommonly occur as a result of seed cane predation. There has been somesuccess in controlling sugarcane borers with insecticides but they needto be applied to the plants before the larvae burrow into the stalks.

Corn earworms (Helicoverpa zea) have been referred to as the most costlycrop pest in the United States. Corn earworms are difficult to controlwith insecticides because they can burrow into the plants and avoidexposure to insecticide applications. Corn earworms have numerousnatural predators but predators and parasitoids alone are not effectiveat preventing crop plant damage by Helicoverpa zea.

Cabbage loopers (Trichoplusia ni) are another widespread pest that candisperse long distances. Cabbage loopers eat leaves of many cropsincluding cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, turnip, rapeseed, mustard,radish horseradish, cress, wasabi, watercress, tomato, cucumber, collardgreens and potato. Cabbage loopers are difficult to control and havedisplayed resistance to Dipel® (available from Valent BioSciences LLC,Dipel is a registered trademark of Valent BioSciences LLC). Janmaat, A Fet al., Rapid evolution and the cost of resistance to Bacillusthuringiensis in greenhouse populations of cabbage loopers, Trichoplusiani., Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Nov. 7, 270(1530), 2263-2270.

Bacillus thuringiensis is a natural soil bacterium. Many Bacillusthuringiensis strains produce crystal proteins during sporulation calledδ-endotoxins which can be used as biological insecticides. Bacillusthuringiensis, subspecies kurstaki, produces a crystal which paralyzesthe digestive system of some larvae within minutes. The larvaeeventually die of starvation. Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki iscommercially available as DiPel® (available from Valent BioSciences LLC,DiPel is a registered trademark of Valent BioSciences LLC).

One advantage of using Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is that itis target specific. It does not harm humans or other non-target species.Frequently when plants are treated with a non-selective insecticide, theinsecticide also kills natural predators of other pests. This can causea rebound effect in the target insect or other opportunistic pestspecies. For example, after applying a non-selective pesticide to killcorn borers, a spider mite infestation might occur because thenon-selective pesticide also killed the spider mites' natural predators.

Yet another advantage of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is thatit can be used on organic crops. With no mandated pre-harvest interval,it can also be used on crops right before harvest. This provides organicgrowers, who have few options for pest control, a safe and effective wayto manage insect infestations that could ultimately ruin an entire crop.

Cyantraniliprole(3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-(methylcarbamoyl)phenyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamideis an anthranilic diamide. Cyantraniliprole has low toxicity to humansand mammals. Further, it is effective at low use rates. Like Bacillusthuringiensis, cyantraniliprole is most effective when eaten by larvae.Cyantraniliprole forces muscles within the larvae to release all oftheir stored calcium, causing the larvae to stop eating and eventuallydie. Cyantraniliprole is commercially available, for example, as Exirel®(available from DuPont, Exirel is a registered trademark of E.I. du Pontde Nemours and Company).

Accordingly, there is a need for safe and effective ways to controldiamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper.These methods should be easy to apply, have increased efficacy, and becost effective.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to methods for controlling diamondbackmoth (Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcaneborer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper (Chrysodeixisincludens) comprising applying a synergistic amount of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole to a plant, whereinthe weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki tocyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Applicant discovered that the use of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp.kurstaki and cyantraniliprole at a weight ratio range of from about1:0.0025 to about 1:15 provided unexpected synergistic effects againstspecific Lepidopteran species. This synergy was unexpected because theresponse to the treatment was highly species specific and even specieswithin the same genera had different results. For example, this mixtureexhibited synergy against diamondback moth, beet armyworm, sugarcaneborer and soybean looper but didn't exhibit synergy against,southwestern corn borer corn earworm and cabbage looper. Accordingly, aspecies' response to the Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki andcyantraniliprole mixtures was very unpredictable and the observation ofsynergy was not expected.

The Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprolesynergistic mixtures are also safe to use on edible plants. Further, thecomponents of the mixtures are target specific and pose low to no riskto beneficial insects or animals.

Another advantage of the present invention is that the combination ofBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole aligns withIntegrated Pest Management (IPM) principles. As mentioned above, inseveral areas of the world, the larvae have begun to develop resistanceto cyantraniliprole. By combining two different products with differentmodes of action, the ability of the insects to dominantly expressmutations which overcome both the Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstakiand cyantraniliprole is very unlikely. This means that the mixture ofBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole can beapplied repeatedly in the same season and year after year with minimalrisk of resistance developing.

Yet another advantage of the present invention is that it allows forless Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and less cyantraniliprole tobe applied to the plant. For example, within label rates, sub-lethaldoses of each can be applied to achieve a lethal dose and control of thelarvae. This allows for a significant cost saving to the grower.

A further advantage is that Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki andcyantraniliprole are target-specific. This means that humans and other,non-target organisms—such as natural predators of diamondback moth, beetarmyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper—will not be harmed by themethods of the present invention.

In an embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods forcontrolling a crop plant pest selected from the group consisting ofdiamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodopteraexigua), sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper(Chrysodeixis includens) comprising applying a synergistic amount ofBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole to a plant,wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki tocyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15.

As used herein, “crop plant pest” only refers to diamondback moth(Plutella xylostella), beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcaneborer (Diatraea saccharalis), and soybean looper (Chrysodeixisincludens).

In a preferred embodiment, the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensissubsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.01 to about 1:7.5.In a more preferred embodiment, the weight ratio of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.04to about 1:3.5.

In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to methods forcontrolling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 50 to about 4,500 grams perhectare. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensissubsp. kurstaki is from about 100 to about 1,300 grams per hectare. In amore preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp.kurstaki is from about 150 to about 1,250 grams per hectare.

In a further embodiment, the present invention is directed to methodsfor controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 7,000 to about 200,000IU/mg. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensissubsp. kurstaki is from about 20,000 to about 170,000 IU/mg. In a morepreferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp.kurstaki is from about 25,000 to about 100,000 IU/mg.

In yet another embodiment, the present invention is directed to methodsfor controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 5,000 to about 100,000Spodoptera U/mg. In a preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 20,000 to about 90,000Spodoptera U/mg. In a more preferred embodiment, the amount of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 40,000 to about 70,000Spodoptera U/mg.

Although in some embodiments, the rates of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp.kurstaki are expressed in grams/hectare, IU/mg, or Spodoptera U/mg, theinvention is not limited to these methods of measuring potency. If otherproducts are developed or marketed with other potency measurements, itis within the knowledge of one of skill in the art, based on Applicant'steaching herein, to convert the rates to effective amounts consistentwith the invention herein to achieve synergistic control of the targetcrop plant pest.

Further, the present invention is not limited to a specific type offormulation. For example, in the examples herein, a dry flowablegranular formulation was used as the source of Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki. However, other types of formulations may be used, includingbut not limited to, wettable powder formulations, water dispersiblegranules, granules, and emulsifiable suspension concentrates. Technicalgrade powders may also be used.

Suitable Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki subspecies strainsinclude, but are not limited to, VBTS-2546, BMP-123, EG-2348, EVB113-19,HD-1, PB-54, SA-11, SA-12, SB4, Z-52, EG-7841, ABTS-351, VBTS-2528, andtransconjugated, recombinant and/or genetically engineered subspeciesthereof.

Suitable Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki commercial productsinclude, but are not limited to, DiPel® (as indicated above, availablefrom Valent BioSciences LLC, DiPel is a registered trademark of ValentBioSciences LLC), BMP 123 (available from Becker Microbials), LepinoxPlus (available from CBC Biogard), Rapax (available from CBC Biogard),Bioprotec 3P (available from AEF Global), Bacillus Chemia (availablefrom Chemia), Biolary (available from Agrimix), Bacillus Agrogen WP(available from Yaser Ltd), Merger/Belthirul (available from Probelte),Delfin (available from Certis), Javelin® WG (available from Certis,Javelin is a registered trademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.), Costar®(available from Certis, Costar is a registered trademark of Certis USA,L.L.C.), Deliver® (available from Certis, Deliver is a registeredtrademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.), BeTa Pro (available from BASF), Biolep(available from Biotech International Ltd), Full-Bac WDG (available fromBecker Microbial), Bacillus MiPeru WP (available from Manejos IntegradosPeru SA), and Crymax® (available from Certis, Crymax is a registeredtrademark of Certis USA, L.L.C.).

In yet another embodiment, the present invention is directed to methodsfor controlling a crop plant pest wherein the amount of cyantraniliproleis from about 10 to about 700 grams per hectare. In a preferredembodiment, the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about 25 to about 600grams per hectare. In a more preferred embodiment, the amount ofcyantraniliprole is from about 50 to about 525 grams per hectare.

The examples herein used a commercial product of cyantraniliprole butthe invention is not limited to the use of this commercial product.Suitable cyantraniliprole products include, but are not limited to,Exirel® (as indicated above, available from E.I. du Pont de Nemours andCompany).

In a further embodiment, the present invention is directed to methodsfor controlling a crop plant pest comprising applying a synergisticamount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole toa plant, wherein the weight ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp.kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025 to about 1:15, andwherein the plant is selected from the group consisting of root, cormand tuber vegetables, bulb vegetables, leafy non-brassica vegetables,leafy brassica vegetables, succulent or dried legumes, fruitingvegetables, cucurbit vegetables, citrus fruits, pome fruits, stonefruits, berry and small fruits, tree nuts, cereal grains, forage andfodder grasses and hay, herbs, spices, artichoke, asparagus, coffee,cotton, tropical fruits, hops, malanga, peanut, pomegranate, oil seedvegetables, sugarcane, tobacco, and watercress.

In another embodiment, the crop plant is genetically modified. A“genetically modified” crop plant is one that has had specific genesremoved, modified or additional gene copies of native or foreign DNA.The change in the crop plant's DNA may result in can result in changesin the type or amount of RNA, proteins and/or other molecules that thecrop plant produces which may affect its response to abiotic (e.g.,herbicide) or biotic (e.g., insects) stresses, and/or affect its growth,development, or yield.

In a preferred embodiment, the root and tuber vegetables are selectedfrom the group consisting of arracacha, arrowroot, Chinese artichoke,Jerusalem artichoke, garden beet, sugar beet, edible burdock, ediblecanna, carrot, bitter cassava, sweet cassava, celeriac, root chayote,turnip-rooted chervil, chicory, chufa, dasheen (taro), ginger, ginseng,horseradish, leren, turnip-rooted parsley, parsnip, potato, radish,oriental radish, rutabaga, salsify, black salsify, Spanish salsify,skirret, sweet potato, tanier, turmeric, turnip, yam bean, true yam, andcultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In another preferred embodiment, the bulb vegetables are selected fromthe group consisting of fresh chive leaves, fresh Chinese chive leaves,bulb daylily, elegans Hosta, bulb fritillaria, fritillaria leaves, bulbgarlic, great-headed bulb garlic, serpent bulb garlic, kurrat, lady'sleek, leek, wild leek, bulb lily, Beltsville bunching onion, bulb onion,Chinese bulb onion, fresh onion, green onion, macrostem onion, pearlonion, potato bulb onion, potato bulb, tree onion tops, Welsh oniontops, bulb shallot, fresh shallot leaves, and cultivars, varieties andhybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the leafy non-brassica vegetables are selectedfrom the group consisting of Chinese spinach Amaranth, leafy Amaranth,arugula (roquette), cardoon, celery, Chinese celery, celtuce, chervil,Chinese spinach, edible-leaved chrysanthemum, garland chrysanthemum,corn salad, garden cress, upland cress, dandelion, dandelion leaves,sorrels (dock), endive (escarole), Florence fennel, head lettuce, leaflettuce, orach, parsley, garden purslane, winter purslane, radicchio(red chicory), rhubarb, spinach, New Zealand spinach, vine spinach,Swiss chard, Tampala, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the leafy brassica vegetables are selected fromthe group consisting of broccoli, Chinese broccoli (gai lon), broccoliraab (rapini), Brussels sprouts, cabbage, Chinese cabbage (bok choy),Chinese napa cabbage, Chinese mustard cabbage (gai choy), cauliflower,cavalo broccoli, collards, kale, kohlrabi, mizuna, mustard greens,mustard spinach, rape greens, turnip greens and cultivars, varieties andhybrids thereof.

In yet another embodiment, the succulent or dried vegetable legumes areselected from the group consisting of Lupinus beans, Phaseolus beans,Vigna beans, broad beans (fava), chickpea (garbanzo), guar, jackbean,lablab bean, lentil, Pisum peas, pigeon pea, soybean, immature seedsoybean, sword bean, peanut, and cultivars, varieties and hybridsthereof. In a preferred embodiment, the Lupinus beans include grainlupin, sweet lupin, white lupin, white sweet lupin, and hybrids thereof.In another preferred embodiment, the Phaseolus beans include field bean,kidney bean, lima bean, navy bean, pinto bean, runner bean, snap bean,tepary bean, wax bean, and hybrids thereof. In yet another preferredembodiment, the Vigna beans include adzuki bean, asparagus bean,blackeyed bean, catjang, Chinese longbean, cowpea, Crowder pea, mothbean, mung bean, rice bean, southern pea, urd bean, yardlong bean, andhybrids thereof. In another embodiment, the Pisum peas include dwarfpea, edible-podded pea, English pea, field pea, garden pea, green pea,snow pea, sugar snap pea, and hybrids thereof. In a preferredembodiment, the dried vegetable legume is soybean. In a more preferredembodiment, the dried vegetable legume is genetically modified soybean.

In a further embodiment, the fruiting vegetables are selected from thegroup consisting of bush tomato, cocona, currant tomato, gardenhuckleberry, goji berry, groundcherry, martynia, naranjilla, okra, peaeggplant, pepino, peppers, non-bell peppers, roselle, eggplant, scarleteggplant, African eggplant, sunberry, tomatillo, tomato, tree tomato,and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment,the peppers include bell peppers, chili pepper, cooking pepper, pimento,sweet peppers, and hybrids thereof.

In an embodiment, the cucurbit vegetables are selected from the groupconsisting of Chayote, Chayote fruit, waxgourd (Chinese preservingmelon), citron melon, cucumber, gherkin, edible gourds, Momordicaspecies, muskmelons, pumpkins, summer squashes, winter squashes,watermelon, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferredembodiment, edible gourds include hyotan, cucuzza, hechima, Chineseokra, and hybrids thereof. In another preferred embodiment, theMomordica vegetables include balsam apple, balsam pear, bittermelon,Chinese cucumber, and hybrids thereof. In another preferred embodiment,the muskmelon include true cantaloupe, cantaloupe, casaba, crenshawmelon, golden pershaw melon, honeydew melon, honey balls, mango melon,Persian melon, pineapple melon, Santa Claus melon, snake melon, andhybrids thereof. In yet another preferred embodiment, the summer squashinclude crookneck squash, scallop squash, straightneck squash, vegetablemarrow, zucchini, and hybrids thereof. In a further preferredembodiment, the winter squash includes butternut squash, calabaza,hubbard squash, acorn squash, spaghetti squash, and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the citrus fruits are selected from the groupconsisting of limes, calamondin, citron, grapefruit, Japanese summergrapefruit, kumquat, lemons, Mediterranean mandarin, sour orange, sweetorange, pummelo, Satsuma mandarin, tachibana orange, tangelo, mandarintangerine, tangor, trifoliate orange, uniq fruit, and cultivars,varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the limes areselected from the group consisting of Australian desert lime, Australianfinger lime, Australian round lime, Brown River finger lime, mount whitelime, New Guinea wild lime, sweet lime, Russell River lime, Tahiti lime,and hybrids thereof.

In an embodiment, the pome fruits are selected from the group consistingof apple, azarole, crabapple, loquat, mayhaw, medlar, pear, Asian pear,quince, Chinese quince, Japanese quince, tejocote, and cultivars,varieties and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the stone fruits are selected from the groupconsisting of apricot, sweet cherry, tart cherry, nectarine, peach,plum, Chicksaw plum, Damson plum, Japanese plum, plumcot, fresh prune,and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the berries and small fruits are selected fromthe group consisting of Amur river grape, aronia berry, bayberry,bearberry, bilberry, blackberry, blueberry, lowbush blueberry, highbushblueberry, buffalo currant, buffaloberry, che, Chilean guava,chokecherry, cloudberry, cranberry, highbush cranberry, black currant,red currant, elderberry, European barberry, gooseberry, grape, ediblehoneysuckle, huckleberry, jostaberry, Juneberry (Saskatoon berry),lingonberry, maypop, mountain pepper berries, mulberry, muntries, nativecurrant, partridgeberry, phalsa, pincherry, black raspberry, redraspberry, riberry, salal, schisandra berry, sea buckthorn,serviceberry, strawberry, wild raspberry, and cultivars, varieties andhybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the blackberries includeAndean blackberry, arctic blackberry, bingleberry, black satin berry,boysenberry, brombeere, California blackberry, Chesterberry, Cherokeeblackberry, Cheyenne blackberry, common blackberry, coryberry,darrowberry, dewberry, Dirksen thornless berry, evergreen blackberry,Himalayaberry, hullberry, lavacaberry, loganberry, lowberry,Lucreliaberry, mammoth blackberry, marionberry, mora, mures deronce,nectarberry, Northern dewberry, olallieberry, Oregon evergreen berry,phenomenalberry, rangeberry, ravenberry, rossberry, Shawnee blackberry,Southern dewberry, tayberry, youngberry, zarzamora, and hybrids thereof.

In another embodiment, the tree nuts are selected from the groupconsisting of almond, beech nut, Brazil nut, Brazilian pine, bunya,butternut, bur oak, Cajou nut, candlenut, cashew, chestnut, chinquapin,coconut, coquito nut, dika nut, gingko, Guiana chestnut, hazelnut(filbert), heartnut, hickory nut, Japanese horse-chestnut, macadamianut, mongongo nut, monkey-pot, monkey puzzule nut, Okari nut, Pachiranut, peach palm nut, pecan, pistachio, Sapucaia nut, tropical almond,black walnut, English walnut, yellowhorn, and cultivars, varieties andhybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the cereal grains are selected from the groupconsisting of barley, buckwheat, pearl millet, proso millet, oats, corn,field corn, sweet corn, seed corn, popcorn, rice, rye, sorghum (milo),sorghum species, grain sorghum, sudangrass (seed), teosinte, triticale,wheat, wild rice, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In apreferred embodiment, the cereal grain is corn. In a more preferredembodiment, the cereal grain is genetically modified corn.

In yet another embodiment, the grass forage, fodder and hay are selectedfrom the group consisting of grasses that are members of the Gramineaefamily except sugarcane and those species included in the cereal grainsgroup, pasture and range grasses, and grasses grown for hay or silage.In further embodiments, the Gramineae grasses may be green or cured.

In another embodiment, the herbs and spices are selected from the groupconsisting of allspice, angelica, anise, anise seed, star anise, annattoseed, balm, basil, borage, burnet, chamomile, caper buds, caraway, blackcaraway, cardamom, cassia bark, cassia buds, catnip, celery seed,chervil, chive, Chinese chive, cinnamon, clary, clove buds, corianderleaf, coriander seed, costmary, cilantro leaves, cilantro seed, culantroleaves, culantro seed, cumin, dillweed, dill seed, fennel, commonfennel, Florence fennel seed, fenugreek, grains of paradise, horehound,hyssop, juniper berry, lavender, lemongrass, leaf lovage, seed lovage,mace, marigold, marjoram, mint, mustard seed, nasturtium, nutmeg,parsley, pennyroyal, black pepper, white pepper, poppy seed, rosemary,rue, saffron, sage, summer savory, winter savory, sweet bay, tansy,tarragon, thyme, vanilla, wintergreen, woodruff, wormwood, andcultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof. In a preferred embodiment, themints are selected from the group consisting of spearmint, peppermint,and hybrids thereof.

In yet another embodiment, artichokes are selected from the groupconsisting of Chinese artichoke, Jerusalem artichoke, and cultivars,varieties and hybrids thereof.

In an embodiment, the tropical fruits are selected from the groupconsisting of avocado, fuzzy kiwifruit, hardy kiwifruit, banana,pineapple, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

In a further embodiment, the oil seed vegetables are selected from thegroup consisting of canola, or oil rapeseed, safflower, sunflower, andcultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.

The synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki andcyantraniliprole may be applied to seeds, foliage, or an area where aplant is intended to grow.

The synergistic amounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki andcyantraniliprole may be applied once or many times during a growingseason. If Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliproleare applied more than one time, the total amount applied should notexceed a yearly maximum rate as determined by environmental protectionagencies or relevant label rates.

As used herein, “plant” refers to at least one plant and not a plantpopulation.

As used herein, “control” or “controlling” means a decline in the amountof damage to the plants from the larvae, reduction of pest population,interference with life cycle development or other physiological orbehavioral effect that results in plant protection.

As used herein, all numerical values relating to amounts, weightpercentages and the like, are defined as “about” or “approximately” eachparticular value, plus or minus 10%. For example, the phrase “at least5.0% by weight” is to be understood as “at least 4.5% to 5.5% byweight.” Therefore, amounts within 10% of the claimed values areencompassed by the scope of the claims.

The disclosed embodiments are simply exemplary embodiments of theinventive concepts disclosed herein and should not be considered aslimiting, unless so stated.

The following examples are intended to illustrate the present inventionand to teach one of ordinary skill in the art how to make and use theinvention. They are not intended to be limiting in any way.

EXAMPLES

The following examples illustrate the synergy of Bacillus thuringiensissubsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole when controlling diamondback moth,beet armyworm, sugarcane borer, and soybean looper. DiPel® DF was usedas the source of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and Exirel® wasused as the source of cyantraniliprole. The present invention is notlimited to the products or formulation types used herein. In eachexample below, the studies were conducted as follows.

For these tests, standardized laboratory leaf dip methods were used toinoculate plant material with treatment(s). Dry, treated leaves wereplaced into Petri dishes (100×25 mm) containing filter paper wetted with500 μl of distilled H₂O (“dH₂O”). Each dish was then infested withbetween 5 and 10 larvae, dependent on species. Efficacy ratings weretaken at specified intervals. Synergy ratings were calculated for eachtest.

Example 1—Diamondback Moth

In this study, the response of diamondback moth larvae to synergisticamounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki (“Btk”) andcyantraniliprole was observed. The results of this study can be seenbelow in Table 1.

TABLE 1 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:0.185)Ratio 24 2 1 16 21 1.25 48 3 6 47 51 No Synergy

As seen in Table 1, the mixtures of the present invention provided morethan an additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant wasable to determine that this response was synergistic: %C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

% C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100), where % C_(exp) is the expected efficacy and “inwhich A and B are the control levels given by the single [insecticides].If the ratio between the experimentally observed efficacy of the mixtureC_(obs) and the expected efficacy of the mixture is greater than 1,synergistic interactions are present in the mixture.” (Gisi,Synergisitic Interaction of Fungicides in Mixtures, The AmericanPhytopathological Society, 86:11, 1273-1279, 1996). Adopting aconservative approach, Applicant determined synergy to be present atratios of ≥1.15.

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 0.1 ppm (0.1 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 0.1 ppm cyantraniliprole.

In order to determine synergy, rates below normal field rate ranges mustbe used. If normal field rate ranges are used, all of the larvae woulddie (combining a lethal or near lethal dose of Bacillus thuringiensissubsp. kurstaki with a lethal dose of cyantraniliprole would most likelylead to larvae death) in every treatment and synergy would not be ableto be determined. A ratio that is indicative of synergy is this assay isa predictor of the synergy that will be seen in the field at normalfield rates (or at rates that occur naturally as the active ingredientsare degraded over time by exposure to rain, UV radiation, andtemperature extremes). This assay was chosen for its ability toaccurately predict mortality rates of larvae in the field.

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy ratio was1.25 at 24 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative ofsynergy, ratios of 1.25 is clearly synergistic. Synergy was shown at aratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole of1:0.185.

Example 2—Beet Armyworm

In this study, the response of beet armyworm larvae to synergisticamounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprolewas observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 2.

TABLE 2 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:1.85)Ratio 24 0 2 20 24 No Synergy 48 0 3 37 44 1.17

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 1.0 ppm (1.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 1.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 2, the mixtures of the present invention provided amore than additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant wasable to determine that this response was synergistic: %C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy ratio was1.17 at 48 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative ofsynergy, ratios of 1.17 and 2.02 is clearly synergistic. Synergy wasshown at a ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki tocyantraniliprole of 1:1.85.

Example 3—Cabbage Looper

In this study, the response of cabbage looper larvae to Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. Theresults of this study can be seen below in Table 3.

TABLE 3 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:0.926)Ratio 24 0 2 15 12 No Synergy 48 0 5 51 44 No Synergy

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 0.50 ppm (0.50 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 0.50 ppmcyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 3, the mixtures of the present invention failed toprovide a more than additive effect. By using the following formula,Applicant was able to determine that this response was synergistic: %C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

Example 4—Sugarcane Borer

In this study, the response of sugarcane borer larvae to synergisticamounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprolewas observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 4.

TABLE 4 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:1.85)Ratio 24 0 0 30 38 1.26 48 0 4 32 41 1.18

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 1.0 ppm (1.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 1.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 4, the mixtures of the present invention providedsynergy against this species. By using the following formula, Applicantwas able to determine that this response was synergistic: %C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy was 1.26 at24 hours and 1.18 at 48 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 isindicative of synergy, the ratios of 1.91 and 1.67 are synergistic.Synergy was shown at a ratio of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstakito cyantraniliprole of 1:1.85.

Example 5—Southwestern Corn Borer

In this study, the response of southwestern corn borer larvae toBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole wasobserved. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 5.

TABLE 5 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:0.185)Ratio 24 1 1 23 19 No Synergy 48 6 12 39 25 No Synergy

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 0.1 ppm (0.1 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 0.1 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 5, the mixtures of the present did not provide synergyagainst this species. By using the following formula, Applicant was ableto determine that this response was not synergistic: %C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

Example 6—Soybean Looper

In this study, the response of soybean looper larvae to synergisticamounts of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprolewas observed. The results of this study can be seen below in Table 6.

TABLE 6 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:7.2)Ratio 24 0 0 6 6 No Synergy 48 0 1 10 13 1.18

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 1.0 ppm (1.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 1.0 ppm cyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 6, the mixtures of the present invention provided amore than additive effect. By using the following formula, Applicant wasable to determine that this response was synergistic: %C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

The results of this calculation indicated that the synergy ratio was1.18 at 48 hours. As a finding of higher than 1 is indicative ofsynergy, the ratio of 1.18 is synergistic. Synergy was shown at a ratioof Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole of 1:1.85.

Example 7—Corn Earworm

In this study, the response of corn earworm larvae to Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and cyantraniliprole was observed. Theresults of this study can be seen below in Table 7.

TABLE 7 Time after % Efficacy treat- Neg. Btk + ment Controlcyantraniliprole Synergy (h) dH₂O Btk Cyantraniliprole (Ratio 1:1.81)Ratio 24 4 6 29 38 No Synergy 48 4 8 33 44 No Synergy

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki was applied at a concentration of0.54 ppm (0.54 μg/ml). Cyantraniliprole was applied at a concentrationof 10.0 ppm (10.0 μg/ml). The Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki/cyantraniliprole mixture was applied at a concentration of 0.54ppm Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and 10.0 ppmcyantraniliprole.

As seen in Table 7, the mixtures of the present invention did notprovide a more than additive effect. By using the following formula,Applicant was able to determine that this response was not synergistic:% C_(exp)=A+B−(AB/100).

In summary, synergy was seen against diamondback moth, beet armyworm,sugarcane borer, and soybean looper. Synergy was not seen onsouthwestern corn borer, corn earworm or cabbage looper.

We claim:
 1. A method of controlling a crop plant pest selected from thegroup consisting of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), beetarmyworm (Spodoptera exigua), sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis),and soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens) comprising applying asynergistic amount of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki andcyantraniliprole to a plant, wherein the weight ratio of Bacillusthuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about 1:0.0025to about 1:15.
 2. The method of claim 1 wherein the weight ratio ofBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is from about1:0.01 to about 1:7.5.
 3. The method of claim 2 wherein the weight ratioof Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to cyantraniliprole is fromabout 1:0.04 to about 1:3.5.
 4. The method of claim 1 wherein the amountof Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 50 to about4,500 grams per hectare.
 5. The method of claim 4 wherein the amount ofBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 100 to about 1,300grams per hectare.
 6. The method of claim 5 wherein the amount ofBacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki is from about 150 to about 1,250grams per hectare.
 7. The method of claim 1 wherein the amount ofcyantraniliprole is from about 10 to about 700 grams per hectare.
 8. Themethod of claim 7 wherein the amount of cyantraniliprole is from about25 to about 600 grams per hectare.
 9. The method of claim 8 wherein theamount of cyantraniliprole is from about 50 to about 525 grams perhectare.
 10. The method of claim 1 wherein the crop plant pest is Beetarmyworm (Spodoptera exigua).
 11. The method of claim 1 wherein the cropplant pest is Soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens).
 12. The method ofclaim 1 wherein the crop plant pest is sugarcane borer (Diatraeasaccharalis).
 13. The method of claim 1 wherein the crop plant pest isdiamondback moth (Plutella xylostella).
 14. The method of claim 1wherein the plant is selected from the group consisting of root, cormand tuber vegetables, bulb vegetables, leafy non-brassica vegetables,leafy brassica vegetables, legumes, fruiting vegetables, cucurbitvegetables, citrus fruit trees, pome fruit trees, stone fruit trees,berry trees and vines, nut trees, cereal grains, forage and foddergrasses and hay, herbs, artichoke, asparagus, coffee plant, cottonplant, tropical fruit trees, hops, malanga, peanut, pomegranate, oilseed vegetables, sugarcane, tobacco, and watercress.
 15. The method ofclaim 14 wherein the plant is genetically modified.
 16. The method ofclaim 14 wherein the cereal grains are selected from the groupconsisting of barley, buckwheat, pearl millet, proso millet, oats, corn,field corn, sweet corn, seed corn, popcorn, rice, rye, sorghum (milo),sorghum species, grain sorghum, sudangrass (seed), teosinte, triticale,wheat, wild rice, and cultivars, varieties and hybrids thereof.
 17. Themethod of claim 16 wherein the plant is genetically modified corn. 18.The method of claim 14 wherein the legumes are selected from the groupconsisting of Lupinus beans, Phaseolus beans, Vigna beans, broad beans,chickpea, guar, jackbean, lablab bean, lentil, Pisum peas, pigeon pea,soybean, immature seed soybean, sword bean, peanut, and cultivars,varieties and hybrids thereof.
 19. The method of claim 18 wherein theplant is genetically modified soybean.